 |
 |
I have received a courtesy copy of The Boulay 300, an art auction publication from England. I was sent issue #3, January-February 1999, and in their title the word "Boulay" is marked as beings trademarked. I offer my unsolicited review of this useless magazine. This has got to be the most pompous and arrogant art publication I have ever read in my 47 years of studying art. (I am 64 years old and began my art education when I was 17.) The subscription cost is $500.00 for ten issues. The publication is 52 pages, soft cover and their subscription form states it is "Your definitive guide to the 300 key lots at auction each month." It also states "The Boulay 300 is for the serious collector and investor. A fundamental tool for all dealers, galleries and auctions houses." (yes "auction houses" is printed with an s on the end of auction.) These comments are both stupid and untrue. This magazine serves no useful purpose for the serious collector, one who spends a considerable amount of money to purchase quality art. I do not know a serious collector who does not subscribe to the auction catalogs of the major auction houses in his collecting interest. The Boulay 300 would serve him no purpose in making his decisions on what to purchase. Issue #3 has eight pages of stories (or gossip) about the art market, an index to the issue and offers a totally useless third of a page graph called the "AMR-Boulay Index." I can only assume this index is supposed to illustrate the present state of the art market but it fails miserably. The remaining 44 pages offer paragraphs about selected lots coming up for auction at various auction houses. I must quote a few of their paragraphs with comments: 1. Upcoming Doyle auction in New York, January 28, Old Master Paintings and Drawings: "Lot the (E) News about Tiepolo got from Venice to Vienna painfully quickly. These attractively junky mid 18th-century Austrian debasement's of the great man are sketches for architectural interior decoration, no more, mural and ceiling, but they make one sorry for the painter from whom they were ordered because he has considerable personal talent and a sharp ability to characterize of his own - best of all in The Sacrifice of Isaac, which is very nicely done here." This quoted paragraph describes a pair of paintings, cataloged 18th century Austrian School, each 13 1/2" x 17", oil on canvas. They have a pre sale estimate listed as 10,000 to 15,000 British pounds. Does their quoted paragraph make you want to run to Doyle's and bid on these two works? I think not. 2. Upcoming Christie's Amsterdam sale, January 19 and 20, Paintings, Watercolors and Drawings: "Lot 489 Joe Raphael, a Californian (died 1950), painted beach, city and coastal scenes in France, Belgium and Holland with yawning debts to Dufy and the Dutchman Kaemmerer but with a minor deft originality of his own. This undated, sunny double sided watercolor delivers his virtues of composition and vices of idleness." This quoted paragraph describes a watercolor titled Beach at Moordwijk, 13 1/4" x 23". It has a pre sale estimate of $500 to 700. Does this sound like a writing about a "key lot" being offered at auction. I wonder how the writer was able to call Joseph Raphael, "Joe." Could they have known him before he died in 1950? The last sentence of another paragraph describing a painting in this Amsterdam sale reads "This watercolor is commended as a modest success." Would a member please explain this to me! The subscription form contains three endorsements: 1. "It has just become easier to buy important lots at auction...The Boulay 300." By Wendy Moonan, New York Times. Not much to say - a useless statement. 2. "This is a useful tool. The timing is very good." By Hugh Hildesley, executive vice president, Sotheby's New York. A very self-serving statement, surely any auction house appreciates all the publicity they can receive. 3. "It is an excellent resource for collectors who buy at auction." By Andree Corroon, Christie's New York. Again very self-serving but an untrue statement. In my opinion this is not an excellent resource. It is a terrible resource. The publication lists as its contributing editors: 1. "Amy Page Respected in the US for her contributions to Art & Auction." (This is typed exactly how it is printed, no comma after her name.) This statement is questionable. Many people I know thought she did a very bad job when she was with Art & Auction. 2. "Godfrey Barker Doyen of auction writers." The senior member of the world's auction writers - no comment. 3. "Huon Mallalieu Auction correspondent for Country Life." I think the sole purpose for this publication, at the subscription price of $500.00 per year, is to allow the Editor-in-Chief Jeffery Coorish and the three contributing editors to live in the lifestyle and manner of which they would like to become accustomed. It certainly is not to provide the art world with any useful information. A waste of any institutions money. PAUL E. STERNBERG, SR. Appraiser